Apple this week kicked its eco-friendly MacBook campaign into overdrive with new placements on network television and top-tier internet properties; meanwhile, Research in Motion considered taking a shot at Apple in a new television commercial but ultimately couldn't bring itself to pull the trigger (video included).

MacBook campaign heats up

In recent days, readers report seeing more of Apple's "greenest family of notebooks" ads during prime time television on FOX and other networks. The spots tout the premium-priced MacBooks and MacBook Pros at a time when rival PC vendors are instead surrendering to the economy and pushing margin-diluting, budget machines such as netbooks.

Visitors to the websites of Ars Technica, CNN, the New York Times, and others were similarly greeted this week with a web ad of considerable stature, in some cases consuming as much as 25 percent of the above-the-fold real estate on those websites when viewed on a notebook-sized screen.

The latest ad spotlights the new $2800 17-inch MacBook Pro, with its "revolutionary new battery that has a lifespan of up to five years, three times longer than batteries in most notebooks." Apple explains in the spot that this will translate to "fewer batteries in landfills."

The Mac maker's green notebook campaign comes after years of criticism from activists over the company's environmental track record.

Back in May of 2007, Apple chief executive Steve Jobs authored an open letter outlining the company's green goals and noted the progress it had already made in comparison with its competitors.

Ad agency's BlackBerry bullet opens fire on Apple

In the ad industry, creative firms sometimes produce "spec" spots to demonstrate their talent and catch the eye of companies' marketing departments. New York-based Guava, with its concept for Research In Motion's BlackBerry Storm, has gained plenty of attention with an anti-Apple message that's now unlikely to go much further than internet circles.

The ad depicts a blackberry bullet making a mockery of an apple in slow motion. The bullet continues through the fruit with the tagline, "The world's first touch-screen BlackBerry. Nothing can touch it."

After some consideration, RIM reportedly decided against picking up the ad for its BlackBerry Storm (reviews) campaign. Its main target, the iPhone, outsold RIM's entry into the touch-screen game to the tune of four to one last quarter.

They should pull the ad and fire the ad agency. What a weak ad by Blackberry. It tells absolutely no reason why to buy the blackberry- there is no advantage or compelling reason given.

You're taking it too literally. Stop being a techie and put yourself in the shoes of the majority of the market.

RIM's ad presents a powerful image, artfully done. It's pretty slick, actually. It gets people to ask questions. There doesn't need to be any reason given for an ad to get its message across. It's all about suggestion. There doesn't need to be any voiceovers, or even anything concrete. It's all about imagery. There are plenty of ads that use this approach, and quite effectively, too. The problem here isn't about the ad's effectiveness, but rather, its timing and the realities of their product.

You're taking it too literally. Stop being a techie and put yourself in the shoes of the majority of the market.

RIM's ad presents a powerful image, artfully done. It's pretty slick, actually. It gets people to ask questions. There doesn't need to be any reason given for an ad to get its message across. It's all about suggestion. There doesn't need to be any voiceovers, or even anything concrete. It's all about imagery. There are plenty of ads that use this approach, and quite effectively, too. The problem here isn't about the ad's effectiveness, but rather, its timing and the realities of their product.

I agree. If I didn't know anything about the product I would probably head to over to Blackberrys website and take a look. These teases should have been airing before they released it. At least in the iphone "hello" teases they showed the product.

I think their ad is genius. If their touchscreen product was in fact superior (or at least comparable), I'd say the ad is a winner... but given that it's proven to be a dud as reviewed by virtually every tech columnist, I think they might want to refrain from taking a shot at Apple until their product improves.

Nowadays ads are supposed to be memorable. They're supposed to stand out in your brain. We as a public get bombarded with so many ads on a daily basis. The number of ads a person sees on a given day continues to rise throughout the decades, but how much of that we process isn't dependent on the input number. Everyone subconsciously filters out the crap.

So yes, this ad would be great if it were true. Reminds me of the fantastic Audi Superbowl commercial (for fans of the Godfather.)

Agreed. Given I like Verizon and despise ATT, I checked out the Storm as a possible 'good enough' iphone-like device. It was terrible. Hard to do anything. Very un-intuitive. Often didn't work as intended (some web pages didn't give me a magnifying glass, so I couldn't read them...). And the virtual keyboard is a phone-keyboard??? huh?

Forget RIM's add-
Do you think people really buy laptops because they're environmentally friendly? Even cars and refrigerators barely are advertised for that reason. It's value that's usually advertised- especially now in a depression.
Apple should kill the perception that its overpriced by showing the va$ue in an Apple purchase.

Smart move by RIM. Which company is in better financial shape? I'd say it's not a good idea to rile a much more powerful competitor. Worst case for RIM, Apple decides it's time to start firing back in their own ads.

I am not sure if they are less than honest. Honesty here is ambiguous. They may not tell the whole truth, but that is not their purpose. They 'highlight' the advantages. But few ads lie outright.

Quote:

and appeal to the emotions.

That is true. An ad strives to PERSUADE the viewer / listener / reader to buy a product or service. Most people act upon emotions first and foremost. Look at the apple ads - no 'facts' whatsoever. But there are strict guidelines as to what is and isn't allowed in advertising.

Hard to say...the execs must've seen something in there they didn't like. If it's going to increase sales, you go with it. If you compare it to Apple's iPhone adds, they at least show you some app functionality you can download and use. All this was was a very nicely done image-merical. I suspect if someone were savvy enough to understand the imagery, they would probably be savvy enough to ask for something with a little more substance for the money.